Engine command passthrough from Telegram (e.g., /plan, /resume, /experimental)

[santialferez]

Hi Takopi maintainers,

I’m using Takopi with the Telegram transport and it’s been working really well. I’d like to propose a feature that would improve ergonomics when using engines that have their own interactive “slash commands” (e.g., Codex CLI).

Problem

In Telegram, messages that start with /... are naturally interpreted as Takopi commands/directives (e.g., /new, /ctx, /agent, /file). This makes it hard to access engine-native commands like Codex’s /plan (and other engine commands such as /resume, /experimental, etc.) from within the Telegram chat.

Right now, the main workaround is to encode the behavior into prompts, or to manage/resume sessions externally and then re-attach via reply/resume lines when possible. It works, but it’s not as smooth as having engine commands available directly in chat.

Requested feature: “engine command passthrough”

Add an option that allows certain commands to be forwarded to the active engine instead of being handled by Takopi.

Possible shapes:

• A dedicated prefix command, e.g.:

  • /engine /plan
  • /engine /experimental ...
  • /engine /resume <id>

• Or an “engine command mode” toggle for the chat/topic, where unknown /... commands (or a configured allowlist) are forwarded to the engine.

• Or a configurable mapping, e.g. forward /plan → engine, while keeping Takopi’s own commands intact.

Requirements / Considerations

• Must not break existing Takopi commands, so some form of namespacing or allowlisting seems safest.
• Ideally works per chat/topic, and for multiple engines (forward to whichever engine is active for that scope).
• If forwarding is not supported by a given engine, Takopi could either return a clear error or treat it as plain text.

Why it’s useful

• Restores the UX people expect from engine CLIs (especially the “plan-first” workflow).
• Makes it easier to use advanced/experimental engine features without leaving Telegram.
• Reduces the need for custom plugins for common engine commands.

Thanks for considering!

Santiago

[santialferez]

Hi maintainers — quick follow-up from my side after testing more deeply.

After understanding Takopi’s architecture better, I think my previous “engine command
passthrough” proposal does not really fit Takopi’s purpose.

Takopi is designed around headless engine execution (e.g. codex exec --json) and
transport-level orchestration, while many engine slash commands (/plan, /experimental,
etc.) are fundamentally interactive TUI flows. So even if Takopi forwarded those
commands, the expected interactive behavior would often still not work in Telegram.

Given that, I now see two practical patterns instead:

1. tmux route (for full TUI control):
   Keep the engine running in terminal/tmux and control it there (or remotely) with things
   like tmux send-keys + tmux capture-pane.

2. Hybrid TUI + Telegram workflow:
   Do TUI-only actions in terminal first, then continue in Takopi/Telegram by resuming the
   same session (e.g. paste a resume line like codex resume <id> in chat and proceed
   headlessly).

So from my side, I’m no longer pushing for the passthrough feature as a core Takopi
change.

Thanks again for the great project.

Santiago